TY - JOUR
T1 - Prebiotics, probiotics, fermented foods and cognitive outcomes
T2 - A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
AU - Marx, Wolfgang
AU - Scholey, Andrew
AU - Firth, Joseph
AU - D'Cunha, Nathan M
AU - Lane, Melissa
AU - Hockey, Meghan
AU - Ashton, Melanie M
AU - Cryan, John F
AU - O'Neil, Adrienne
AU - Naumovski, Nenad
AU - Berk, Michael
AU - Dean, Olivia M
AU - Jacka, Felice
N1 - Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier
PY - 2020/11
Y1 - 2020/11
N2 - This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate randomized controlled trials that investigated the use of probiotic, prebiotic, and fermented food interventions for cognitive performance. In total, 22 studies (n = 1551) were included that investigated probiotics (11 studies, n = 724), prebiotics (5 studies, n = 355), and fermented foods (6 studies, n = 472). Despite several individual studies (14 of 22) reporting significant improvements in specific cognitive domains, results of the pooled meta-analysis found no significant effect for any intervention for global cognition (Probiotics: g = 0.115, 95 %CI -0.041, 0.270, p = 0.148; Prebiotics: g = 0.077, 95 %CI -0.091, 0.246, p = 0.369; Fermented food: g = 0.164 95 %CI -0.017, 0.345, p = 0.076) or any individual cognitive domain. Most studies (16 of 22) had low risk of bias. These results do not support the use of probiotic, prebiotic, and fermented food interventions for cognitive outcomes. This may be due to the limited number of small and short-term studies as well clinical heterogeneity relating to the population, cognitive tests, and intervention. Therefore, further trials that investigate these interventions in clinical populations using adequately powered samples are warranted. PROSPERO: CRD42019137936.
AB - This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate randomized controlled trials that investigated the use of probiotic, prebiotic, and fermented food interventions for cognitive performance. In total, 22 studies (n = 1551) were included that investigated probiotics (11 studies, n = 724), prebiotics (5 studies, n = 355), and fermented foods (6 studies, n = 472). Despite several individual studies (14 of 22) reporting significant improvements in specific cognitive domains, results of the pooled meta-analysis found no significant effect for any intervention for global cognition (Probiotics: g = 0.115, 95 %CI -0.041, 0.270, p = 0.148; Prebiotics: g = 0.077, 95 %CI -0.091, 0.246, p = 0.369; Fermented food: g = 0.164 95 %CI -0.017, 0.345, p = 0.076) or any individual cognitive domain. Most studies (16 of 22) had low risk of bias. These results do not support the use of probiotic, prebiotic, and fermented food interventions for cognitive outcomes. This may be due to the limited number of small and short-term studies as well clinical heterogeneity relating to the population, cognitive tests, and intervention. Therefore, further trials that investigate these interventions in clinical populations using adequately powered samples are warranted. PROSPERO: CRD42019137936.
KW - Cognition
KW - Fermented foods
KW - Meta-analysis
KW - Prebiotic
KW - Probiotic
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090022218&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.07.036
DO - 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.07.036
M3 - Article
C2 - 32860802
VL - 118
SP - 472
EP - 484
JO - Biobehavioral Reviews
JF - Biobehavioral Reviews
SN - 0149-7634
ER -